Edited Jun. 3, 2019 at 1:31 p.m.
For folks saying that's not enough for Zucker; a lot of Wild fans have responded positively to that suggestion as is, without pushback.
Quoting: JeffW
Am I the only person that thinks Zucker isnt worth a 1st rd pick? Kerfoot and kapanen are basically the same player.
Why does everyone think the avs want to collect all the 40 pt players in the league and pay them more than they are worth? When they have the space and need for higher skilled players
I think you underestimate a) how good Zucker is and b) how good a fit he would be for our team...especially if he was paired with MacK n Landy on the top line; so that all of those chances that Kerf squandered for us this past postseason, would instead be falling to a guy who really knows how to finish and has a 30 goals season under his belt already. Plus the way he uses his speed on the forecheck would help those two in a way Kerf doesn't; as it would create more turnovers for them to pounce on and extend OZone time for that line.
Similar thing with Kapanen v Kerfoot; the pt-totals may not suggest a big difference, but Kapanen is much better against the puck (both 5on5 & on the PK), he can score...which our top 6 lacks and would continue to lack with the addition of the pass-first Hayes...and, again, his game just screams Bednar and the way he wants us to play in a way Kerf just doesn't with his ineffectiveness in puck battles neutering his utility on the forecheck & cycle.
These moves aren't a super-sexy-dream-scenario, but: Hayes is a fully capable 2C, who would fill our biggest hole through most of the window that MacK's sweetheart deal creates for us, perfectly well, while being able to handle a heavier defensive workload; Kap is basically what we hope Jimmothy Timmothy develops into if all goes perfectly...and Zucker is an upgraded version of that same archetype; who I am confident would put up 30 again if he spent most of his time on our top line, and he would do so while making life easier on those two & freeing Mikko up to drive the 2nd line except when we really needed that big-line-magic.
The most appealing thing about this scenario for me would be that all three carry reasonable enough acquisition costs for there to be some chance of us actually getting all 3...and not entering yet another season hoping that someone can step up to fill a top 6 spot. Which would mean all of our good-bottom-6ers would actually get to stay in the bottom 6, and not be overplayed in positions they can't thrive in for long.
...like Jost, he was looking great playing 13 minutes a night against 3rd liners this past postseason, but if you had asked him to play 16+ minutes a night against top 6 opposition, his skating limitations would have become more of an issue & there's a very good chance that we would not have seen him finish the campaign on such a high note...or inversely with Soda; who was hot-garbage in the playoffs after getting over-worked all season and then was asked to do more than he was capable of by needing to center Mikko's line. But keep him at the 3C, playing his heavy game on a checking line with some wingers that are ready to grind, and he'd give us an advantage at that spot against most teams that we'd run into.